The Senate Committee on Transportation was called to order by Chairman William R. O'Donnell, at 2:54 p.m., on Thursday, April 29, 1999, in Room 2149 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman

Senator Mark Amodei, Vice Chairman

Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen

Senator Maurice Washington

Senator Raymond C. Shaffer

Senator Valerie Wiener

Senator Terry Care

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

Assemblyman David R. Parks, Clark County Assembly District No. 41

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Joan Moseid, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

Robert A. Ostrovsky, Lobbyist, Nevada Resort Association, and The Hertz Corporation, stated he was there in several capacities including as a member of the Commission for Cultural Affairs, the Board of Museums and History, and the committee who is helping to design the new general issue license plate. He said the law currently states the general issue license plate can only be blue and silver with white as a substitute. He pointed out the bill will amend the statute with the words "predominantly blue and silver." This change will allow for more design flexibility. He noted the variety of color in other license plates (Exhibit C).

Mr. Ostrovsky conveyed that the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS) requires signatures on certificates of origin to be in pen and ink. He pointed out the ever increasing volume of certificates of origin requires a more expedient method of authorization. He referenced several examples of laser signatures used by major car manufacturers, and a letter from the U.S. Department of Transportation stating that digitally-scanned and laser-printer signatures complies with the odometer disclosure requirements (Exhibit D). He concluded that A.B. 76 would change the signature requirements to permit the use of digitized signatures.

Chairman O’Donnell said he would like to amend this bill to include the use of the heart shaped symbol for more flexibility in personalized license plates. He said the wording should say, "all letters, numbers, and symbols."

Raymond L. Sparks, Deputy Director, Public Safety, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, stated the DMV&PS would need to purchase the die to make the symbol, otherwise there is no problem.

Hearing no further testimony, Chairman O’Donnell closed the hearing on A.B. 76. He noted the sponsor has requested A.B. 186 be pulled. He opened the hearing on A.B. 457.

Michael E. Hood, Colonel, Chief, Nevada Highway Patrol Division (NHP), Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, said the NHP is in support of the bill, and believes it would add another tool to enforcing aggressive driving infractions.

Senator Wiener inquired about other states’ action regarding road rage. Colonel Hood responded that California has recently passed a bill, and some other western states are working on legislation.

Chairman O’Donnell observed that if the violations listed in the bill are misdemeanors, then an officer would have to be present to witness them. Colonel Hood responded that was correct, and added that often law enforcement witnesses several violations in a short period of time.

Assemblyman David R. Parks, Clark County Assembly District No. 41, stated from prepared testimony (Exhibit E) that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) defines aggressive driving as the operation of a motor vehicle in a manner which endangers or is likely to endanger persons or property. Aggressive driving is a sequence of traffic violations that endangers others. He pointed out that aggressive driving is on the increase, and A.B. 457 will help to make Nevada’s highways safer.

Nile D. Carson, Jr., Lobbyist, Deputy Chief, Reno Police Department, City of Reno, commented that although the bill lists multiple violations, law enforcement would not issue multiple tickets. He emphasized the bill identifies aggressive driving for what it is, and allows the courts to act on the offense at hand. He noted that aggressive driving leads to road rage by others.

Colonel Hood stated there are laws now that deal with the listed violations independently. This bill emphasizes the seriousness of the offense by labeling it aggressive driving, thus leading to stronger penalties.

Senator Care wondered about the one mile in the bill, and if it would make enforcement difficult. Colonel Hood stated that there are several ways an officer could determine the distance covered.

Senator Washington expressed concern the bill may put additional burdens on the court, and take away judicial discretion. Assemblyman Parks responded the intent was not to have the defendant plead down to a lesser charge.

David S. Gibson, Lobbyist, Legislative Representative, Clark County Public Defender, acknowledged that the bill may increase the number of charges, but not necessarily the number of defendants. He continued that he sees problems with the distance, and with the definition of two speeding violations.

Senator Care wanted to know if there was the potential for double jeopardy because drivers could face prosecution under different statutes for the same offense. Mr. Gibson said that if all of the elements of one citation are essentially the same as the other charges, then it would be double jeopardy.

Senator Washington inquired whether there was another way to handle the elements so there was no double jeopardy. Mr. Gibson responded that any other action by a person of a criminal nature would have had to occur at a different point in time; whereas, this bill has a beginning and ending point in time in which several acts have a potential for occurring.

Senator Washington speculated that there has to be an easier way to enumerate various offenses. He suggested that the first thing may be to define what is aggressive driving, then there is something to compare types of driving violations.

Senator O’Donnell wanted to know how a public defender would envision this proposed legislation working in the court.

Gemma Greene, Lobbyist, Deputy District Attorney’s Association, stated not only is there a double jeopardy problem, but also a question about the 1-mile designation. She noted a case could be lost by a measurement of 1-mile plus 1-inch. She emphasized that she did not think there was any officer who can, with any degree of specificity, tell that the violations occurred within 1 mile.

Senator O’Donnell wanted to know what would preclude a defender from stacking a charge. Mr. Gibson responded there is nothing to prevent how an officer may write a citation, but stacking is taken into consideration in those rare instances when it may occur.

Ms. Greene pointed out the difference in the bill is a suspended license, which is 12 points, where reckless driving is 8 points.

Joanne M. Keller, Highway Safety Coordinator, Office of Traffic Safety, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, added that of contributing factors to fatal crashes over the last 3-years, four of the violations listed in this bill are among the top ten.

Ben Graham, Lobbyist, Legislative Representative, Clark County District Attorney, and Nevada District Attorneys’ Association, stated if a driving violation is going to happen, it is going to happen in a short time. He said it will be in a matter of a few blocks, let alone a mile. He noted that the moving violations are one thing, because they are the acts that lead to the charge of aggressive driving, which is another charge. He believes that combination would not constitute double jeopardy.

Stan R. Olsen, Lobbyist, Lieutenant, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, and Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association, stated he is in favor of A.B. 457. He also agreed that the consecutive moving traffic violations usually occur within a relatively short distance.

James F. Nadeau, Lobbyist, Captain, Lobbyist, Washoe County Sheriff’s Office, and Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association, stated he supports A.B. 457 as another tool. He added that when an aggressive driver affects another driver, the other driver can sign as a witness, which helps the case.

Senator Wiener wanted to know if a person was cited for four violations, but the distance was one and a tenth miles, could the case be thrown out because of the mileage technicality. She said, if so, then a definition of aggressive driving is needed.

Chairman O’Donnell noted that law enforcement supports the bill as another tool for them, but it may be viewed differently from the court’s perspective. Captain Nadeau conveyed it is the number of elements cited that point to aggressive driving, and this helps the prosecutor in not having to accept a lesser plea.

Senator Washington stated that as he reads section 2, subsection 3, paragraph (a), it takes away the judge’s choice of sentencing. Mr. Graham commented that allegations are just that, and there would have to be a finding of guilt before sentencing can happen.

Senator Care observed the bill gives the prosecutor the option of whether to prosecute. Mr. Graham noted the uniform traffic citation is a primary notice of complaint. In many instances the citation is treated as a notice to the driver of the charges. Mr. Graham said if it does go to trial, the prosecuting office usually prepares a separate typed complaint, and that would be the formal document used to go to trial rather than the actual citation.

Richard E. Shrader, Jr., Lobbyist, AAA Nevada Insurance Agency, said they are in favor of the intent of A.B. 457. He supported the suggestion for a definition of aggressive driving. He stated that as aggressive driving increases, more motorists are reporting concern about being on the highways.

Hearing no further testimony, the hearing on A.B. 457 was closed. Chairman O’Donnell opened the hearing on A.B. 503.

Assemblyman Lynn C. Hettrick, Carson City and Douglas counties Assembly District No. 39, stated that due to some misuse and stalking issues resulting from open access to DMV&PS information, by simply giving a license plate number, access was denied to the general public, including private investigators. Assemblyman Hettrick emphasized all A.B. 503 does is allow private investigators access for insurance purposes only.

Warren B. Hardy II, Lobbyist, Nevada Investigators Association, stated he is in favor of the bill.

Charles McChesney, Lobbyist, President, Nevada Investigators Association, stated the association supports A.B. 503.

Mr. Gibson said he would like to amend the bill to include, "an agent of the public defenders office" (Exhibit F). He stated the law as it now stands has severely handicapped criminal investigations by public defenders. He stressed that the men and women from the public defender’s office who go to residences to interview people, have no way of knowing who they may encounter at an address. He stated shots have been fired at some of his people and their vehicles. He said that with information obtained through just a license plate, the type of neighborhood would be known, the criminal background of the people, the fact that there are different people at the address, and backup can be called to lend support and protection.

Chairman O’Donnell conveyed to Mr. Gibson that the only way he would consider an amendment at this juncture is if Mr. Gibson would produce written approval from the bill’s sponsor and Assemblyman Hettrick. Chairman O’Donnell closed the hearing on A.B. 503.

Chairman O’Donnell opened the hearing on A.B. 552, stating he would entertain a motion. He stated he would draft wording to be read on the floor of the Senate to clarify the bill is directed to ages 16 through 17, and not age 18.

Senator Care asked for clarification of the date on the license.

Chairman O’Donnell responded that it is the date of issuance and not the birth date of the driver.

*****

Chairman O’Donnell opened the hearing on A.B. 620.

Ms. Keller, stated the committee for testing for intoxication was established under Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 484.388. Reading from prepared testimony (Exhibit G), she said the committee holds public meetings which means there is a meeting-posting requirement as well as transcribed minutes. The public hearing process is duplicated and the use of approved devices may be delayed for well over a year. She said that currently the list of approved devices is under Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) chapter 484. By removing the list from regulations, there would be no need for additional public hearings and workshops, and would shorten the approval process to add a device to the list. The bill does not change the testing requirements.

Senator Wiener inquired about a progress report and the type of devices that have been approved.

Suzanne Harmon, Criminalist, Breath Alcohol Section, Washoe County Sheriff, stated she evaluates the devices. She said there are three ignition interlock devices which have been approved for Nevada. She said the device is very accurate for measuring alcohol on a person’s breath, and it is a behavior modifier. She added all devices must have microprocessing capabilities. The device is checked every 90 days, but if alcohol is detected, the device gives the person only 5 days to turn it in; otherwise the vehicle becomes inoperable.

Chairman O’Donnell closed the hearing on A.B. 620, and opened the hearing on A.B. 678.

Dana L. Mathiesen, Management Analyst, Drivers License Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, stated in her prepared testimony (Exhibit H) that the use of digital images would allow faster more efficient service, photo driver’s licenses by mail, provide photos to law enforcement, and minimize document fraud. Ms. Mathiesen stated that Polaroid is raising the cost of film, but will hold the price of 94 cents for each photo through fiscal year 2000. The cost to digitize would be $2.11 for each photo, which also includes the initial cost of equipment. The additional funds will come from the Highway Fund to process the photos.

Donna C. West, Assistant Chief, Driver Services, Drivers License Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, clarified that because Nevada is a small state it shares the cost of film with states like Oregon and Washington who use the same process. Those states will go digital next year leaving Nevada as the only state still using Polaroid for photo identification (Exhibit I). She said in addition to driver’s license photos, the system is used for law enforcement, identification cards, and employee cards. Ms. West stated the equipment is already at all the offices around the state to be installed, tested, and ready for use by the end of fiscal year 2000.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:48 p.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Laura Adler,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman

DATE: